STUDIES IN MATTHEW
Part 7/14 -
Stephen Bohr
THE RETURN OF
TH EAGLE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E2Pt8-Xijso
EPISODE INI JUGA TIDAK SAYA
TERJEMAHKAN KARENA KURANG RELEVAN BAGI KITA YANG TIDAK HIDUP DI AMERIKA. INI HANYA
KOMENTAR-KOMENTAR DARI MEREKA YANG SEKARANG BERPENGARUH DI AMERIKA SERIKAT YANG
SEPAKAT MENGGABUNGKAN KEKUASAAN PEMERINTAH DENGAN KEKUASAAN RELIJIUS.
During the last 5 studies together,
we’ve noticed the central theme of the abomination of desolation. And basically
we’ve looked at it from different angles. The first angle that we’ve dealt with
is the historical application to the destruction of the literal city of
Jerusalem in the year 70. We’ve noticed that the Romans brought their eagle
standards with the golden reed around the eagle, and that was the sign that
God’s people were supposed to flee from the city.
Then we went on to study the end time
application of the eagle and the sun. And we’ve noticed that a country, the US,
whose emblem is the eagle, believe it or not, someday will impose by force of
law the observance of the day of the sun. And that is the abomination of
desolation in the end time. Probably after we studied that, some people were
wondering whether that would be possible in the USA, after all this is the land
of the free and the home of brave.
So we studied what happened around the
year 1888. And we noticed that this scenario is not only possible, but it
almost took place once in the 1880’s. And we noticed in our studies as we read
the quotations from the National Reform Movement of that day and age that many
things were happening among Protestants and Catholics, to proclaim to the US
was a Christian nation and also to write into the Constitution a national
Sunday Law.
In our 4th study together, we
studied Ellen White’s end time prophetic scenario, in the light of Revelation
chapter 13. And we noticed that her scenario is very similar to what took place
around the year 1888.
Now, what I would like to do in our
study today, in the 5th study, on the abomination of desolation in Matthew
chapter 24, is speak about what is happening in the USA today among our
politicians as well as among especially the Religious Right in this country.
Now, I’ve decided to hold my notes today
because there are so many quotations that I am going to read from
political and religious leaders that
show, that what is taking place in the US today is very similar to what took
place in the 1880’s. Now, what I would like to do is ~ as I mentioned ~ go
through what is happening in the Christian and political world today. There is
something very interesting that is happening in Christendom in the US. There is
a great desire among conservative Protestants and conservative Catholics to
fight against a common enemy known as secular humanism. Now, in fighting
against secular humanism, there is a great danger that in fighting against this
enemy, they become like the enemy.
Friedrich
Nietzsche that great philosopher once said some very wise
words. He said, “Beware, when you fight the dragon, less
you become a dragon.” In other words, the Religious Right
today is fighting the dragon of secular humanism, but in fighting the dragon,
prophecy says, that they will become just like the dragon.
Now, I want
to tell you that I am not questioning the sincerity of those who belong to the Religious
Right in the US. I am sure they are very, very sincere, and they believe 100% that
what they are doing is right. But we must remember that Saul of Tarsus felt the
same way. Saul of Tarsus was definitely sure that he was right in persecuting
Christians and he was zealous for the Lord and he was zealous for what he
believed to be the truth. But he was sincerely wrong.
Now allow me
to mention some of the main protagonists in the US today that belong to this
desire to moralize America, so to speak. We have for example:
·
Chuck Colson of Watergate fame. You know
he is actually the president of international prison ministries.
·
We have Dr. D. James Kennedy, Coral
Ridge Ministries in Fort Lauderdale has a huge church there, he also was the
individual who formed the very famous evangelistic method known as Evangelism
Explosion.
·
You have Pat Robertson who is the
President of CBN, the Christian Broadcasting Network, also he hosts the 700
club many times, he is also the chancellor of Regent University and he founded
the American Center for Law and Justice.
·
We also have among this group ~ actually
he is not with the group anymore because he is deceased ~ but the late Jerry
Falwell, the pastor of the Thomas Road Baptist church has 2500 members and also
he was the chancellor of Liberty University.
·
We have James Dobson, who has probably
the largest syndicated family show on radio in the US focus on the family.
·
We have Rod Parsley who has a huge
church in Columbus, Ohio, his ministry is called Harvest Ministries.
·
We have Gary Bauer, who is the head of
the Family Research Council,
·
Charles Stanley who sells more CD’s and
cassettes than any ministry in the US, In Touch Ministries is the name of his
ministry.
·
You have Bill Bright, who is the
president of Campus Crusade for Christ.
·
You have William Bennett known as Bill
Bennett, who wrote the book on Christian’s virtues, The Book of Virtues, and
also speaks loudly about the need for the US to return to its moral roots.
· We have Tim LaHaye who is the
President of the American Coalition for Traditional Values. In fact he is co-author of the famous Left
Behind series along with Jerry Jenkins, which by the way provides the end time
theology for the Religious Right.
· We have John Hagee who has a huge church in St. Antonio, Texas,
and is a prolific writer presenting prophecy from a futurist perspective.
· For a long time there was Ralph Reed, the Director, the CEO of
the Christian Coalition.
·
We have John Whitehead
who is the head of the Rutherford Institute who would like to establish in the US a theocracy.
And I could
continue the list of influential leaders in the US that are intent on
moralizing America by using the political process.
Incidentally,
something that they are doing with, is tampering with the First Amendment to
the Constitution of the US. In fact what they are doing is reinterpreting the
Constitution. They are saying that the First Amendment to the Constitution does
not forbid Congress from treating all religions equally, or helping all
religions equally. What is forbidden is for Congress to favor one church or one
religion above another.
Notice for
example the 1994 Agenda of the Republican Party, this is found in the book Contract
with the American Family pg. 4-5. You remember the Newt Gingrich
revolution in 1994 when the Republicans took over Congress. Notice what this
book Contract with the American Family says, “The founding fathers intended the establishment clause to insure that
America’s political institutions would never be used to benefit one religion at
the expense of another.” But the First Amendment does not say
that Congress shall not make any law respecting the establishment of a church,
or the establishment of a religion. The First Amendment says, Congress shall
make no law respecting the establishment of religion, period. In other words,
Government is to keep out of the business of religion.
William Rehnquist who for many years was the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court
of the US in 1985 when he dissented on a school prayer case had this to say
about the original intent of the framers of the First Amendment. He says, “To prohibit the designation…”
he says that “… the Constitution only was meant to prohibit the designation of any church as
a national one [and] to stop the Federal Government from asserting a preference
of one religious denomination or sect over others.”
By the way this is a new interpretation of the establishment clause of the
First Amendment of the Constitution of the US. Rehnquist also said that the
establishment clause merely, and I quote “forbade the
establishment of a national religion and forbade preference among religious
sects and denominations…” He said “…that it did not prohibit the Federal Government from
providing…” listen to this, “…non-discriminatory aid to religion.”
Pat Robertson had this to say in Cosmopolitan magazine in 1995, pg. 160, this
is January. He says, “The First Amendment says… Congress
can’t set up a national religion. End of story. There is not in the
Constitution, at any point, anything that applies that to the States.” [The Fierce Furious March of
Fundamentalists].
So basically what they
are doing is reinterpreting the First Amendment of the Constitution. Saying
that it forbids the establishment of one religion above others, one church
above others, but it does not forbid non-discriminatory help for all religions
equally.
Now, it is interesting
to notice the strategy of the Religious Right in these days. At first their
strategy was to march on Washington. Probably many of you remember the
“Washington for Jesus” rally, that was led by Pat Robertson. He had a big cross
over his shoulder and there were several hundred people around him and they
marched to the capitol because they were going to demand Rights for Christians.
The fact is the Christians Rights has become much more sophisticated in recent
years. They discovered that marches on Washington don’t do much. They
discovered that what they need to do is lobby members of Congress. And they
have also discovered that politics is local, all politics is local, in other
words take over school districts, take over local precincts, and then you’ll be
able to take over the State House, and eventually you’ll be able to take the
Federal Government. In other words they discovered that you begin at the grass
roots. In fact Ralph Reed who for a long time was the leader of the Christian
Coalition had this to say about the original strategy of the Religious Right
and how they changed their strategy. He says, “We
tried to charge Washington, when we should have been focusing on the states.
The real battle of concern to Christians, are in the neighborhoods, school
boards, city councils and state legislatures.” [Church and State, April 1990,
pg. 12]
You see, they are saying
that the Government is discriminating against the church. That the church is
being persecuted because the church is not allowed to put religious themes on public
Government property.
Now, I want you to
notice that the Constitution does not forbid placing religious themes on public
property. What it forbids is placing religious themes on Government’s public
property. Because that is a violation of the establishment clause of the
Constitution of the US. For example when Judge Moore placed his granite
monument of the 10 Commandments in his court house, he was forced to leave his
position as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court in Alabama because he refused to
take that monument out of his court house. The fact is, that he could have
placed that monument if he had wanted to in his front lawn, he could have
placed it any place in front of a store if the store would allow him to do it,
he could have done that. The fact is that the government is not discriminating
against Christianity when the government does not allow placing religious
themes on government property, what they are doing is doing what the
Constitution says, they are keeping out of the business of religion. They are
remaining neutral when it comes to religion.
Now, there’s
an attempt being made among the Religious Rights today, to change the
Constitution of the US. In fact, we have all heard recently the desire for a
constitutional amendment to say that marriage is between a man and a woman.
By the way
you know that if a constitutional convention is called, they can not only
propose an amendment for marriage to be between a man and a woman, but they
could also propose an amendment for a national Sunday law if they wish. And
that’s the direction in which Satan is trying to move things.
Notice this statement
from the book Contract with the American Family, once again, I read from this
before, pg 1, it says this, “We have witnessed the
steady erosion of the time honored Rights of religious Americans. The time has
now come to amend the Constitution to restore freedom of speech for America’s
people of faith.”
Well, folks there is no
other country in the world that has greater freedom of speech than the US. But
they mean by freedom of speech being able to use the government for speech. And
the First Amendment to the Constitution forbids that. Do you know that some
religious leaders as happened in the 1880’s are actually saying that if some
people in the US don’t like our Christian government or our spiritual Christian
heritage, they should pick up their things and they should go to some country
where they feel more comfortable.
For example Great Dickson several years ago had a prayer hitlist, where he actually asked his members to pray that God would remove from office everyone who was against the enforcement of the Christian religion in the public square.
Edna deVries who for a
while was Alaska’s state senator once stated that non-Christians should leave
the country.
You know, there’s been
this big debate in the US as to whether students can pray in school or whether
students can read their bibles in school of whether students can gather
together and study in groups the bible. The fact is that the First Amendment
allows students to pray in public schools. The Constitution allows students to
gather for study groups in school, studying the bible. What it does not allow
is the government preparing the curriculum and mandating the study of religion
in school or mandating prayer and organizing prayer in public schools. Now,
there are some over-zealous teachers sometimes, who will reprimand students for
bringing their bibles to class and reading it. But when those teachers have
been taken to court they invariably have lost in court because the First
Amendment guarantees your private right even in public school to read your
bible and to pray and voluntarily students gather together to pray and to study
the bible.
Now something else that
is very interesting that the Religious Right is doing today and they’ve been
doing this for many, many years is distributing in the churches voters guide to
kind of indicate to their church members who they should vote for. And of
course the politicians are very happy to oblige them. You know one of the big
dangers of politicians today is that in order to gain votes they cater to
religious people, not because they are religious, not because their heart is
converted but because they want to win votes. And I don’t think I have to read
very many statements from religious leaders today because probably many of you
have received in the mail voters guide that suggest you should vote for this
candidate, and you should not vote for this candidate. And usually the litmus
test has to do with marriage, it has to do with abortion, it has to do with
pornography, it has to do with these cutting edge issues. And so basically, the
same thing is being done today as was done in the 1880’s. The churches are
telling their members who to vote for, who to vote into office, and who to vote
out of office.
For example, Tim LaHaye
several years ago suggested that 25% of federal jobs should go to Christian
conservatives. He also said this, “No humanist is
qualified to hold any governmental office.” [Time,
Sept 2, 1985]. Now, that flies to the face of the
14th Amendment to the Constitution of the US where it says that there
will be no religious test to occupy any office of trust in these US. And yet
the Religious Right today is saying that secular humanists, people who believe
in gay marriage, people who are pro-choice have absolutely no right whatsoever
to occupy a place in the government. By the way, that is unconstitutional.
Now, Protestants and
Catholics today are also coming together. Just like they were in the 1880’s to
fight for common causes. Allow me for example to read you a statement that Billy
Graham made, Aug 12, 1993 on the program Good Morning, America, I heard
this with my own ears. The pope was visiting the US, and he was asked what he
thought about the pope. And Billy Graham said this, “I
admire the pope. We both address the same moral issues.”
When the pope visited
Salt Lake City, Billy Graham was interviewed by Larry King on his program Larry
King Live, on Jan 21, 1998. And I want to read a little bit of a conversation
between Larry King and Billy Graham.
Here’s King: “Do you feel comfortable with Salt Lake City? Do
you feel comfortable with the Vatican?”
Graham’s answer: “Oh, I am very comfortable with the Vatican.
I’ve been to see the pope several times, and in fact the day that he was
inaugurated, made pope, I was preaching in his cathedral in Krakow. I was his
guest.”
King: “You were
preaching in his church the day he was made pope?”
Graham: “That is
correct. In Krakow.”
King: “You must
have been shocked.”
Graham: “Of course I
was. There was shouting on the streets, you know, the next day: people said
‘Polish pope!’ ‘Polish pope!’”
King: “Do you
like this pope?”
Graham: “I like him
very much. He is very conservative… He and I agree on almost everything.”
How far has
Protestantism gone from its roots, that the greatest evangelist in US would say
something like that!
In fact Billy Graham got
an honorary doctorate from a Jesuit Roman Catholic University, Belmont Abbey
College, and when somebody asked the college whether this was true that Billy
Graham had received an honorary doctorate from a Jesuit University, Cuthbert
Allen, Executive Vice President of the institution had this to say about the
day that Billy Graham received his honorary doctorate. I quote, “Billy Graham gave an inspiring and theologically sound address
that might have been given by Bishop Fulton J. Sheen or any other Catholic preacher… I have
followed Billy Graham’s career and I must emphasize that he has been more
Catholic than otherwise. I say this not
in a partisan manner, but as a matter of fact. .. I would state that he would
bring Catholics and Protestants together in a healthy ecumenical spirit….” He said this about Billy Graham. It’s incredible. “… I was the first
Catholic to invite Billy Graham. I know that he will speak at three other
Catholic universities next month. I believe he will be invited by more Catholic
colleges in the future than Protestant colleges. So I am well pleased then to
answer your question: Billy Graham is preaching a moral and evangelical
theology, most acceptable to Catholics.”
Is that an amazing
statement? From a Roman Catholic University that has given an honorable
doctorate to the greatest evangelist of the 20th century? It’s
amazing. [25’22]
Notice what Ralph Reed
had to say. By the way he was Director of the Christian Coalition for a long
time. He got in on his feet. Very influential lobbyist. Notice what he said in
his book Politically Incorrect, pg. 16. “The future of the American politics lies in the growing
strength of Evangelicals and their Roman Catholic allies. If these two core
constituencies ~ Evangelicals comprising the swing vote in the south, Catholics
holding sway in the north ~ can cooperate on issues and support like-minded
candidates they can determine the outcome of almost any election in the nation.
Nasty nativism and dark distrust about popery and foreign influence have been
swept into the ash heap of history. John F. Kennedy’s election in 1960 buried
the Catholic bogeyman forever. No longer burdened by the past, Roman Catholics,
Evangelicals, Greek Orthodox and many religious conservatives from the mainline
denominations are forging a new alliance that promises to be among the most
powerful and important in the modern political era.”
Ralph Reed also had this to say in a discourse that he gave to
the Catholic Campaign in America, notice this amazing statement: “The Catholic vote holds the key to the future, and I
believe that if they can unite, if Catholics can unite with Evangelical Christians, the Protestants who
share their views on the sanctity of innocent human life and the need for
religious liberty, and school choice, and common sense values, I believe that
if Catholics and Evangelicals can unite there is no person who runs for office
in any city or any state in America that can’t be elected, and there is no bill
that can’t be passed in either House of Congress or any state legislative
chamber anywhere in America. It is the emerging force in the electorate today.
The pope does use the term hierarchy of doctrine. Father Robertson said,
‘Obviously some teachings are more important than others and there has to be…” now notice this! “…an agreement on those
essential points while leaving considerable latitude on other points that are
less essential to the faith.”
Notice what Ellen White
had to say in Great Controversy pg. 445. She says almost the identical thing
almost a hundred years earlier, but she criticizes this point of view. She says
this, “When
the leading churches of the US, uniting upon such points of doctrine as are
held by them in common shall influence the state to enforce their decrees and
sustains their institutions, then Protestant America will have formed an image
to the Roman hierarchy and the infliction of civil penalties upon dissenters
will inevitably result.”
Are those words
prophetic or what? Absolutely! We are seeing it before our very eyes.
What can I say about the
document Evangelical
and Catholics Together? 40 influential Roman Catholic and Evangelical
scholars sign this 5 page document. It is interesting that in this document the
signers said, “Let’s not proselyte the members from our fellow churches
anymore. Let’s just preach the gospel, let’s moralize society, when you know we
have to fight against secular humanism, let’s not fight over petty doctrines.
Let’s just face together the common enemy.”
Notice that this document was signed on March 29, 1994.
Chuck Colson of Watergate fame, had this to say about this document: “Evangelicals and
Catholics have been vying in one another as Christian brothers and sisters in
various activities, notably, in the
pro-life movement and the charismatic renewal. Our concern was and is, that
animosities between Evangelicals and
Catholics threaten to mar the image of Christ by turning Latin America into a
Belfast of religious warfare.” In other words he is
saying that particularly in Latin America there is this warfare among
denominations because they are proselytizing members from others. Of course the
Roman Catholic church is the most concerned, because for example in Mexico,
Jehovah Witnesses, Seventh Day Adventists, Pentecostals, Mormons and Baptists,
are making huge inroads into the Roman Catholic church. So, to them it was a
good idea for Evangelicals and Catholics together to sign this document to not
proselytize members from other churches.
Notice USA Today,
March 13, 1994 reporting on this document: Evangelicals and Catholics Together.
“The leaders, in a statement, are urging the nations’ 52 million
Catholics and 13 million Evangelicals to no longer hold each other at
theological arms length and stop aggressive proselytizing of each others’
flocks, in short to turn their theological swords into a recognition of a
common faith.”
Keith Fournier, one of the individuals who signed this document, wrote a book
called House
United. This book has huge ecumenical implications, and I want to read
a statement that he made in this book on page 336. By the way Keith Fournier is
a Roman Catholic. He says this, “Catholics, Protestants
and Orthodox can come together, must come together and are coming together. The
wall of separation is cracking, portions of the wall are beginning to fall
away. Christians are waking up and starting to see each other as family.”
What about the Joint
Declaration on Justification by faith, where the Lutheran Church and
the Roman Catholics basically said in 1995, “we
agree on the doctrine of righteousness by faith.”
Luther must be rolling over in his grave, and I am speaking figuratively, I am
not speaking literally, because we know that the dead know nothing. But if he
resurrected today, he would not recognize the Lutheran church. He would not
recognize the Protestant movement that he started.
Notice what Kenneth Kantzer
in Christianity
Today [Nov 7, 1986] had to say.
“Finally we [Catholics and Evangelicals] can work
together on those political and social issues where we are in such strong
agreement. Our united efforts in these areas will do much to influence the
world to the good… In spite of basic differences, we can use our common
Judeo-Christian value system to forge moral leadership that will advance the
cause of justice and peace through a stable society in our nation and around
the world.”
Do you remember that in
1880’s they were uniting for good causes? They are uniting for good causes
today. Who isn’t pro-life in the SDA Church? We are definitely pro-marriage
between a man and a woman, aren’t we? But we know that they are going to link
this with the National Sunday Law, just
like it happened in the 1880’s.
Notice what Pat
Robertson had to say about this issue of Catholics and Protestants
coming together. He said, “I believe frankly that the Evangelicals and the Catholics in
America, if they work together, can see many pro-family initiatives in our
society and we can be an effective counterbalance to some of the radical
leftist initiatives.” [Church and State,
Aug 1988]
Chuck Colson wrote the Introduction to a book by Keith Fournier, the name of
the book is Evangelical Catholics. And this is what he said, “It’s high time that all of us who are Christians come together
regardless of the differences of our confessions and our traditions, and make
common cause to bring Christian’s values to bear in our society. When the
Barbarians are scaling the walls there is no time for petty quarrelling in the
camp.”
He also says this, “But at root, those who are called of God whether Catholic or
Protestant, are part of the same body. What they share is the belief in the
basics, the virgin birth, the deity of Christ, His bodily resurrection, His
imminent return and the authority of His infallible Word. They also share the
same mission, presenting Christ as Savior and Lord to a needy world.”
I beg your pardon, but
we do not share the same message and the same mission as the Roman Catholic
church. Where do you have important life and death issues like the Sabbath,
like the state of the dead, like healthful living, like living a sanctified
life?
He also had this to say,
“I pray that this book will be read by Catholics and Protestants
alike, that…” now notice the terminology, “that
it will be a bridge across many of the
historic divisions in the church that have weakened our stand in today’s
culture.”
And Keith Fournier in this same
book, said this on pg. 12, “We Christians have
differences ~ important, critical differences. But we have far more in common
both in beliefs and in mission. These believers have built on their
commonalities without denying their differences.”
He continues saying on
pg 65 “But as long as we see ourselves as disconnected, even
polarized, communities with some of us adhering to ‘the right faith’…” in quotation marks ‘the right faith’, “…while the rest of us
are languishing in error, we will never receive the incredibly rich benefits of
a worldwide revival.” In other words, as long as we say that my
theology is right and yours is wrong, there will never be a worldwide revival,
is what he is saying.
What about Jesus saying,
that unity needs to be in spirit and in truth, according to Scripture.
He also says on page 65, “We must see that we were meant to be one church united…” speaking about Evangelicals and Catholics, “…under one Head for the
purpose of carrying out a twofold mission: proclaiming the gospel and maturing
in Christ.”
On page 153 he says
this, “As
we prepare to move into the next millennium…” this
was at the end of the last millennium, “…will we do it
together, recognizing that what we have in common far exceeds what separates
us? Or will we allow our internal divisions
to hold us back from fulfilling
our heritage?”
Interesting.
You know, one theologian
criticized this move of Protestants and Catholics to join together. His name is
John
Swamley, and he had to say this, “The Roman
Catholic bishops are also at work
politically to end separation of church and state. They are working in
an infernal alliance with fundamentalist
Protestants, not only on the abortion issue, but to get government support of
private church schools… The major Protestant denominations have been
effectively silenced by ecumenism, falsely based on fear of offending the
Catholic hierarchy.” [the Saving of
America, pg. 77]
Two
professors from Jerry Falwell’s Liberty University had this to say about the
alliance between Roman Catholics and Protestants. They said this ~ by the way
this is a Baptist, conservative Baptist university in case you are wondering
what Liberty University is ~ they said this, “We are seeking a political alliance between the Roman Catholic church
and conservative Protestants that would have a profound impact in the areas of
abortion, family life, school policy and public morality.” [Liberty
Magazine, Mar/Apr 1986] There you have the good causes! In other
words, we are joining with them on the basics in fighting against the dragon of
secular humanism. But folks, when they gain power, they will in turn become the
dragon. Just like Friedrich Nietzsche had to say.
Notice what Ralph Reed
had to say about this union between Protestants and Catholics. and this is the most amazing statements of
all. He said this, “The truth is…” by the way he is speaking to the Catholic Campaign
for America, a group of Catholics. He says, “…
The truth is, you and I are uniting… We are coming together because whatever
theological differences there are, there is far more that unites us and brings
us together than divides us and separates us…The good
news is the chasm is being bridged…” Have you ever
read what Ellen White says that they will stretch their hands across the abyss
to take the hand of Spiritualism, and Protestants, of Roman Catholics. He
continues saying, “…We are coming together because
whatever theological differences there are, there is far more that unites us
and brings us together than divides us and separates us…The good news is the
chasm is being bridged and that those walls are crumbling… The truth, my friend…” and this is the amazing part, “…The truth, my friend, is
this, Catholicism never has been, is not today and never will be a threat to
American democracy… It was and remains
the most colorful and the most vibrant thread running through the tapestry of
American democracy. Cardinal Gibbons said this…” he
is still quoting, “…Cardinal
Gibbons said this, he said, ‘No constitution is more in harmony with Catholic
principles than the American Constitution,
and no religion is in more accord with that Constitution than the Catholic
religion.’”
Listen,
Ralph Reed is either suffering from amnesia or he has been asleep for the last
200 years. He doesn’t know history, folks, because history shows in Revelation
13 that this system ruled the world for 1260 years and the bible says that it
received a deadly wound at the end of the 1260 years and its wound is going to
be healed when it unites with the second beast of Revelation 13, which is
apostate Protestantism represented in the US.
He continues
saying this, “I want you to know that as Evangelicals
we stand shoulder to shoulder with you…”
he is speaking to Catholics, “…in insuring that never again will bigotry be
directed against Catholics and their religion be used to try and silence them
and drive them from the public square. I think you know that we have recently
launched a division of the Christian Coalition called the Catholic Alliance
which is designed to formalize and continue to build bridges in our partnership
with Roman Catholics. The Catholic Alliance, like the Catholic Campaign will be
a lay movement.”
Ralph Reed once said in the Amarillo Sunday News Globe, Dec 10, 1995, he
says, “We can no longer afford to be divided. It is a luxury that is
no longer ours. The left…” that’s secular humanism
by the way, “…
the left wants you and I to be divided. Nothing frightens them more than Christians
shattering the barriers of denomination.”
Is that the voice of the
dragon? Is that exactly what was happening in the 1880’s? Different actors,
different time, but the same thing.
Do you know that they are also attacking the separation of
church and state? Allow me to go into that for a few moments.
Keith Fournier who for a considerable period of time was the president of the
American Center for Law and Justice, which
is Pat Robertson’s organization to defend people in religious liberty
cases, had this to say, “Yet there is a wall, which has been mistakenly erected in our
own beloved country. Its impact on religious freedom has perhaps had an even
more devastating effect, it is the so-called wall of separation of church and
state.”
Pat Robertson had this to say about the wall of separation, the First
Amendment. He says, “They…”
that is the liberal and secular humanists, “…
have kept us…” that is the Evangelical Protestants, “…
in submission, because they have talked about separation of church and state.
There is no such thing in the Constitution. It’s a lie of the left, and we are
not going to take it anymore.” He is saying that
separation of church and state is a lie of the left, of secular humanists.
Notice what Jerry
Falwell had to say about church-state separation. These are great
leaders in the US, prominent leaders. He had this to say, “Separation
of church and state has long been the battle cry of civil libertarians wishing to
purge our glorious Christian heritage from our nation’s history. Of course, the
term never once appears in our Constitution and is a modern fabrication of
discrimination.”
D. James Kennedy, huge church in Fort
Lauderdale had this to say, “If we are committed and
involved in taking back the nation for Christian values there is no doubt that
we can witness the dismantling of not just the Berlin wall but even the more
diabolical wall of separation that has led to secularization, immorality and
corruption in our country.” He is calling the wall
of separation between church and state as a diabolical wall. That is the voice
of the dragon.
How different what Thomas
Jefferson, who actually is the architect of the Republic of the US,
when he spoke to the Danbury Baptist Association, he said this, “I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole
American people which declared that their legislature should make no law
respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise
thereof. Thus,” said Jefferson, he has quoted the First Amendment, he says, “… Thus building a wall of separation between church and state.”
So, even if the
expression “separation of church and state” is not in the First Amendment,
Thomas Jefferson who is the architect of it says, he quotes it and then he says
that this is referring to a wall of separation between church and state.
Notice what William
Rehnquist of the Supreme Court ~ by the way did you know that 5 of the Supreme
Court justices today are Roman Catholics?
Did you know that 4 of them are very, very conservative, one of them is
Justice Kennedy is a little more liberal? But there’s 5, which is greater than
the proportion of Roman Catholics in the US. This is significant.
Now, notice what William
Rehnquist, the late chief Justice of the US Supreme Court had to say.
This is by the way the Chief Judge in the whole USA. He says, “The wall of separation between church and state is a metaphor
based on bad history, a metaphor which has proved useless as a guide to
judging, it should be frankly and explicitly abandoned.” [The Saving of America]
That’s amazing!
Notice what W.A.
Criswell had to say, for a long time he was president of the National
Baptist Convention, which would be like in the SDA church the General
Conference. He was also pastor of the largest Baptist church in the US for some
time, which was the first Baptist church in Dallas. He says this, “I believe that this notion of the separation of church and
state was the figment of some infidel’s imagination.” [The Saving of America pg 59]
By the way, do you know
that the Baptists and the Anabaptists were persecuted like savage animals in
colonial America? And they more than anyone stood for religious liberty and the
separation of church and state. Total about-face to their position in colonial
America and to their position until the moment when John F. Kennedy was
elected.
Notice what Arizona
senator, John
B. Conlan once said. He said, “The separation
of church and state is a false issue. It is a slogan created by the secular
humanists which sounds legal but in fact is a sham. It does not appear anywhere
in the Constitution and it is not a concept that our founding fathers
believed….” Where was he when Thomas Jefferson spoke, is my question. He
continues saying, “ … Separation of church and state
is simply a line of propaganda created by modern humanists to intimidate
Christians and make us believe that we are second class citizens.” [The
Saving of America pg. 59]
Notice what Keith
Fournier had to say at the Second Annual Road to Victory Conference,
Sept 10-12, 1992, he said this, “The wall of separation
between church and state that was erected by secular humanists and other
enemies of religious freedom has to come down. That wall is more of a threat to
society than the Berlin wall ever was. Those opposing our views are the new
fascists.”
Notice what Gary North
had to say, another individual of influential individuals still today
influential in the Religious Right Movement, he says this, “We must use the doctrine of religious liberty to gain
independence for Christian schools until we train up a generation of people who
know that there is no religious neutrality. Then they will get busy in
constructing a bible-based social, political and religious order which finally
denies the religious liberty of the enemies of God.” [The
Assault on Tolerance and Pluralism in America, pg. 5, 6]
Now if that is not the
voice of the dragon, I don’t know what is the voice of the dragon.
Notice what Cal Thomas
had to say. Do you know who Cal Thomas is? He says this, “If
we will not be constrained from within…” in other words if
the Holy Spirit cannot restrain us from within. He says, “If
we will not be constrained from within by the power of God, we must be
constrained from without by the power of the state, acting as God’s agent.” [Harper’s Magazine, 1995, pg. 30]
Wow!
Notice what Pat
Robertson had to say. “There will never be
world peace until God’s house and God’s people are given their rightful place of
leadership at the top of the world….” Who says that
that’s the place God wants His people to be?
“…How can there be peace when
drunkards, drug dealers, communists, atheist, New Age worshippers of
Satan, secular humanists, oppressive dictators, greedy moneychangers,
revolutionary assassins, adulterers and homosexuals are on top? Under their
leadership the world will never, I repeat, never experience lasting peace.
Although I agree it is unwise for the organized church as an institution to get
itself entwined with government as an institution, there is absolutely no way
that government can operate successfully unless led by godly men and women
operating under the laws of the God of Jacob.”
[The New World Order pg 227]
That is called a
theocracy, folks, “operating under the laws of the God of Jacob.” And even
though they won’t admit that this is what they are looking for, it is, it is a
theocracy. The idea that the religious leaders will be the moral conscience of
the nation and the state will do what the religious leaders tell them is moral, and ultimately it is going to lead to the
eagle of the US and the sunburst above his head being used to seal a national
Sunday Law. And eventually people will not be able to buy or sell and you say
this is preposterous, it could never happen. Well, stay tuned, because it is
going to happen.
Notice what Tim LaHaye
had to say: “While it is true that God has already given America three
national revivals in the past, we desperately need another one today….” Would you agree that we need another one today? Sure. Now, how
do you get that revival? By prayer, bible study, and witnessing, right? Notice
the solution he gives. He says, “Personally, I am not
sure we can have one, without legislative reform.” Since
when does legislative reform have anything to do with spiritual revival in the
church?
By the way, he once
spoke about Christians being the salt of the earth. Notice his definition of
Christians being the salt of the earth. He says, “You
can be the salt of the earth by establishing a political action committee, by
encouraging and preaching on Christian activism, by organizing a good
government committee, by circulating petitions, and by lobbying Congress, by
conducting political forums, by introducing candidates at your services…” That’s being the salt of the earth? Be real! The salt of the
earth is sharing the spiritual message of Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord.
Notice what Richard
Hogue had to say in his book Saints and Dirty Politics. He says, “If our country survives ~ and I realize that is a big ‘if’ ~ it
will be because there is an awakening in the lives of committed Christians
across our nation who finally begin to realize that it is not only their
opportunity but also their absolute responsibility to be intricately involved
in the political process of our country and use that involvement to turn this
nation once again to the Lord.”
So once again, revival
comes by political action, by taking over the government. That’s exactly what
was being said, back in the 1880’s.
Notice what Ralph Reed
had to say: “What Christians have got to do is take back this country, one
precinct at a time, one neighborhood at a time, one state at a time. I honestly
believe that in my lifetime we will see a country once again governed by
Christians.”
Notice what Randall
Terry had to say. He is a reconstructionist, a dominionist ~ I don’t
have the time to explain what that means ~ but he said this, “Our goal must be simple. We must have a Christian nation…” remember that back in
the 1880’s? “…
we must have a Christian nation built on God’s Law, on the 10 Commandments, no
apologies.”
Pat Robertson had this to say, “We have together with
the Protestants and the Catholics enough votes to run the country and when the
people say ‘We’ve had enough’, we are going to take over.” [Conservative Digest, Aug 1979].
Robert Grant of Christian Voice which was a branch of Jerry Falwell’s Moral
Majority, had this to say, “If Christians unite we
can do anything. We can pass any law or any amendment, and that’s exactly what
we intend to do.” [Liberty Magazine,
May/June 1980, pg. 4].
And he continues saying,
“We can do anything, we can amend the Constitution. We can elect
a president…” by the way he said this before the election of George W. Bush. “…we can amend the
Constitution. We can elect a president. We can change or make any law in the
land. And it behooves us to do it. If we have to live under the law, as well,
we should live under moral and Godly Law.” [20/20
Democratic National Convention 1980].
One final quotation from
Ellen
White, speaking about colonial times, she says, “The regulation adopted
by the early colonists of permitting only members of the church to vote or to
hold office in the civil government led to most pernicious results. This
measure had been accepted as a means of preserving the purity of the state…” That is if Christians they are the blue ballots that will
preserve the purity of the state. She
says, “…but
it resulted in the corruption of the church. If professional religion being the
condition of suffrage and office holding many actuated solely by motives of
worldly policy united with the church without a change of heart.”
In my next lecture I am
going to read you some quotations about what people are saying about Sabbath
and Sunday today.
Do you know that many of
these evangelical leaders in the Roman
Catholic church are saying that there
needs to be legislation in the US for the observance of Sunday as a day
of rest? We are going to talk about that next time. It’s not to the level of a
national Sunday Law yet, but that’s the way the National Reform Movement began.
We are very close, folks, to the end spoken of in Revelation.
17 11 14
No comments:
Post a Comment